Category Archives: California politics

Post navigation

For the mayor of a city that prides itself on its supposed commitment to human rights and its love of free speech, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s attempt to spare the Butchers of Beijing a little embarrassment is downright pathetic.

Thousands of Americans, including FF’s own Bridget Johnson, were in San Fran today to protest the passing of the Olympic torch, which was en route to Beijing for the summer games. Internationally, these protests have been the cause of much well-deserved shame and humiliation for China’s thugocracy, which had imagined the Olympics would be the regime’s global coming-out party.

But the protest was spoiled, thanks to Mayor Newsom, who had city officials lie about the route the torch would take, so that it could follow another, protest-free path.

Which is, to be sure, exactly what the tyrants in China wanted — a controversy-free photo-op to inflict on their own people and show to the world. Maybe that’s why, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, many of the “pro-torch demonstrators” who were there today “carried red Chinese flags and said they were bused in by the Chinese consulate and other pro-China groups.”

And now no less than the mayor has given Beijing a hand. Nice job, Gav.

One wonders if Newsom would have extended such courtesies to any other potential SF protests. Do you think if, oh, the pope or the president were passing through down, the mayor would have gladly lied to spare them some bad publicity?

No, I’m not calling Newsom a Communist. But a good many Americans — politicians in both parties, and most of the corporate world — have turned a blind eye to the despotic regime’s horrendous practices because, quite frankly, there’s too much money to be made there. (Thus the International Olympic Committee’s bizarre choice of Beijing in the first place.) Companies like Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft, which refuse to block even the most horrific porn in the name of “free speech” here, gladly squelch any sort of political dissidence in Red China. Newsom, who hopes to be governor some day, knows better than anyone what interests he can — and can’t — afford to offend if he wants to cultivate big-ticket campaign contributors.

But by sparing Beijing some shame, Newsom has earned plenty for himself. Check out this quote from SF Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin:

“Gavin Newsom runs San Francisco the way the premier of China runs his country – secrecy, lies, misinformation, lack of transparency and manipulating the populace. He misled supporters and opponents of the run. People brought their families and their children, and (mayoral officials) hatched a cynical plan to please the Bush State Department and the Chinese government because of the incredible influence of money.

“He did it so China can report they had a great torch run. It’s the worst kind of government – government by deceit and misinformation.”

Ah, maybe that’s why Gavin is being a useful idiot for the Butchers of Beijing — he admires their governing style.

That was Arnold Schwarzenegger’s characteristically colorful response to a question from the Daily News editorial board today about whether the state can dredge up more revenues by closing “loopholes” in the tax code. By “meat on the chicken,” Schwarzenegger means cash — he’s sure there’s more of it, somewhere, for Sacramento to scoop up.

But doesn’t Arnold oppose tax hikes? Hasn’t that been his signature position, the one resolute stance that makes him palatable to the state’s increasingly irritated Republicans?

Well, it was …

“I would never begin negotiations by saying this (or that) is is off the table,” Schwarzenegger now says, implying that in budget talks with legislative Democrats, new taxes will certainly be considered. Indeed, “There will be so many things on the table it will be like we’re in the candy store.”

Still, Arnold knows better than to actually say he supports tax hikes. When asked the question directly, Schwarzenegger interrupted and remarked only that he’s willing to close those aforementioned “loopholes.”

But the meatiest of all the “loopholes,” at least according to State Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill, is the home-mortgage deduction — which is anything but a giveaway as far as middle-class homeowners are concerned. Eliminating it would be nothing but a tax hike for millions of Californians. And when pressed, Schwarzenegger specifically declined to say the home-mortgage deduction was off-limits.

Which is to say, tax hikes for everyone will soon be on the table at the Sacramento Candy Shoppe. And Arnold’s days as an anti-tax warrior are numbered …

** UPDATE ** — 3:55 PM — Just got off the phone with gubernatorial aide Matt Davidson, who wanted to clarify Schwarzenegger’s position: “The governor does not believe the home-mortgage deduction is a loophole, but is open to debating all ideas at the table with leaders to solve the ’08-09 budget deficit.”

With the state desperate to scare up new reveneus, various California officials, including the governor, talk about finding ways to milk more money out of the lottery. (Read: Separate foolish people from their wages.) The latest is State Sen. Dean Florez, D-Fresno, who wants to loosen the law so lotto officials can market their product more aggressively.

Nothing unusual there. What’s funny, though, is who’s risen up in opposition to this plan. No, it’s not the anti-gambling puritans but … California’s gaming tribes.

You know, the same tribes who, oh, a month ago, were blasting racetrack owners for opposing an expansion of gambling that just so happened to benefit their interests. The same tribes that spent millions on TV ads telling us that 17,000 new slot machines would be California’s fiscal salvation. The same tribes that have claimed gambling has saved their people from poverty.

Well, times have changed. Now Howard Dickstein, who represents several tribes with casinos across the state, says:

“I know there’s a lot of desperation at the Capitol, but trying to rely on gambling is not the answer.”

Lotteries make a lot of hay by promising the easily fooled the world in return for next to nothing. And so, it turns out, does Arnold Schwarzenegger.

For months, the governor has proposed “privatizing” (which would certainly mean massively expanding) the state lottery to pay for health care, balancing the budget, etc. He frequently claims the state could make $37 billion off of this gambit — an astonishing figure, given that not even the 17,000 new slot machines voters approved under Props. 94-7 are expected to generate that much revenue for the state over 20 years.

In other words, free money — California makes a bundle by doing nothing. Kind of like playing the lottery. But like the lottery, the promised payout here is wildly inflated, and there are far more losers than winners.

The AP took a look at Wall Street’s estimates of the state lottery’s worth, and found that Arnold was using the most optimistic — and unrealistic — numbers, while ignoring the other estimates:

The governor is employing the rosiest of projections from Lehman Brothers, which pegged the value of California’s lottery between $16.1 billion and $37 billion over 40 years.

Other Wall Street investment banks Bear Stearns, Citibank, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley were more conservative. Most estimated the value of a long-term lease at between $7 billion and $29 billion with smaller upfront payments, usually less than $9 billion.

What’s more, to make that money, Californians would have to be willing to get their government — or its contractor proxy — much deeper into the gambling business:

The Wall Street analysts say the state would have to give a private lottery operator freedom to sell tickets over cell phones and PDAs, in malls, on college campuses, at bus stations and through ATM machines. Ticket sales would have to more than double, to $234 per person.

There’s the rub: You want the big bucks, you’ve got to let Sacramento hire charlattans who will try to fleece every gambling addict, fool, poor person, and college student into parting with his money. And even then, the bucks won’t be anywhere near as big as Arnold says they will.

Winner: Steve Poizner, the Republican insurance commissioner who spent $2.5 million of his own dough successfully fighting Proposition 93, the dishonest term-limits initiative designed to keep Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate President Don Perata in office for a few more years.

By leading the fight against 93, Poizner has made himself the (gazillionaire) David who slew the Goliath of special interests aligned to support the measure. It wasn’t easy. Early polls, aided by deceptive ballot language (thanks a bunch, Jerry Brown) had Prop. 93 way ahead. In October, 49 percent of those asked said they would Prop. 93, while just 31 percent said they were opposed.

Poizner had everything going against him: All the special interests, the governor and top legislative leaders, and a misleading ballot. Yet he still managed to defeat Prop. 93 — and give a strong boost to his own political future at the same time.

And that takes us to the biggest loser of the day — Nunez, the architect and principal beneficiary of the measure. Nunez used every tool at his disposal, even shaking down his own underlings in the Assembly for contributions. But neither all that money nor a slew of sleazy ads could do the trick for him.

Now, termed out of the office he worked so hard to keep, Nunez has no choice but to — shudder! — go find gainful employment.